Cursed Child is a fun read, but lacks that Harry Potter magic

Title: Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, Parts One and Two (Harry Potter #8)
Authors: J. K. Rowling, John Tiffany, Jack Thorne
Publisher: Arthur A. Levine Books
Publication Date: July 31st 2016 (Good planning on somebody's part)
Number of Pages: 327

What Goodreads has to say:

The Eighth Story. Nineteen Years Later.

Based on an original new story by J.K. Rowling, Jack Thorne and John Tiffany, a new play by Jack Thorne, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child is the eighth story in the Harry Potter series and the first official Harry Potter story to be presented on stage. The play will receive its world premiere in London’s West End on July 30, 2016 [why not July 31st?].

It was always difficult being Harry Potter and it isn’t much easier now that he is an overworked employee of the Ministry of Magic, a husband and father of three school-age children.

While Harry grapples with a past that refuses to stay where it belongs, his youngest son Albus must struggle with the weight of a family legacy he never wanted. As past and present fuse ominously, both father and son learn the uncomfortable truth: sometimes, darkness comes from unexpected places.

What I have to say:

Harry Potter and the Cursed Child is a great read: fun, exciting, and very sweet in places. 

But it's not the Harry Potter I know.

One of the reasons for that may be that, although J. K. Rowling's name appears larger than anyone else's on the cover of the book, she didn't actually write it, as you'll discover on closer inspection. The book, or script if you prefer - since it is really a script in book form - is "based on an original new story by J. K. Rowling, John Tiffany & Jack Thorne" but the actual playwright is John Thorne, not Rowling. And while Thorne is clearly a talented writer, I don't think he knows either the characters or the world of Harry Potter as well as Rowling does.

I'll start with the bad, so we can end on a good note.

*********************WARNING: SPOILERS********************

(I don't think I give away anything major, certainly not "the big secret" (#KeepTheSecrets) but if you want to be completely surprised, maybe you should go read the book and come back to this review afterward.)

Plot

To cut to the chase, I was disappointed that this story once again revolved around Harry and Voldemort. We had seven books about that, and yes, they were awesome, but now I think it's time to move on. Harry works at the Ministry of Magic; there are endless story possibilities there. We don't have to go back over that old territory for the eighth time: we can be more creative than that, and honestly, there's so much to work with in the world of Harry Potter. Constructing a plot around Cedric Diggory, Harry Potter, and Voldemort, especially when you have the whole of the wizarding world to choose from, feels like a cop out. It's redundant.

But aside from just simple redundancy, here's the thing that probably bothered me the most about the whole rehashing of the Chosen One/Harry vs. Voldemort plot line: You all remember that last sentence from The Deathly Hallows? Who doesn't? In fact, when I Google "last sentence" the first result that comes up is "of Harry Potter":

The scar had not pained Harry for nineteen years. All was well.

So I have a great idea: let's totally disregard this wonderful last line of the book that made Harry Potter fans all over the world cry tears of joy, and let's change it so Harry has pain again and everything's definitely not well, 'cause I don't think he deserves to have a happy, carefree life after those 18 years of torture.

These are not my sentiments, but they are those, apparently, of Jack Thorne, or whoever was responsible for this plot point.

In one scene of The Cursed Child, Harry wakes up after a nightmare about Voldemort and finds that his scar is hurting. If this isn't the worst decision in the world on the part of the script-writers, I don't know what is. It only completely undermines the entire series and voids the closing moment of the very last book. I'll admit that it makes sense for Harry to still have occasional nightmares about Voldemort - I mean I still have nightmares about high school sometimes, and I'm pretty sure Voldemort's way more traumatic - but there's no excuse for making his scar hurt again.

Character

Another thing that bugged me (I promise there were things in the book that I liked and will get to later) was character inconsistency. Now, I know people change when they get older, and sometimes you're a completely different person as a grown-up than you were as a teenager, but I honestly don't feel like some of the mainstay Harry Potter characters would have said and done the things that they said and did in this book. 

For one thing, it kind of makes Harry out to be a sucky father: even though (which is totally inconsistent) he tells his son that the bravest man he ever knew was in Slytherin and he'll be just as proud of his son no matter what house he's sorted into, he's clearly disappointed when his son is sorted into Slytherin. And he proceeds to have a lot of yelling matches with his son in which he insults him pretty profoundly. 

Now, I get that teenagers can be a pain in the rear, but even when he's driven to exasperation, this does not fit in with the kind, fearless, and unfailingly good Harry Potter that I thought I knew. I'm sure Harry wouldn't be the perfect father and I'm sure he'd make a lot of mistakes just like all parents do, but I don't feel like he'd make these kinds of mistakes or that he'd screw up this badly. Sure, he had an anger management problem when he was 15, but I'm pretty sure he got over it.

Also, I feel like Ron got short shrift. His character was basically reduced to a guy who tells bad jokes and eats constantly (and I mean constantly). I know Ron always liked food, and maybe that tendency increased as he got into middle-age, but there's a lot more to his character and I didn't feel like he ever got a chance to do anything important. There were a couple of moments with him and Hermione that were really sweet, and in those scenes his character came out a little more, but for the most part he came across as kind of lame, which is sad.

OK, let's move on to the good!

Scorpius.

Scorpius is quite possibly the best part of the book. Despite being the son of Draco Malfoy, he's unfailingly loyal, downright hilarious, and at times very sweet. (Then again, maybe Draco had a sweet side that we never saw, I don't know.) What's more, Scorpius has integrity, and he's not afraid of anything. He's awesome.

Hermione is the Minister for Magic.

Yeah, it's pretty sweet.

At one point, Hermione is a rebel warrior.

Also pretty sweet. Obviously Jack Thorne likes Hermione. But then again, who doesn't?

Harry works out his differences with Draco Malfoy.

About time.

Harry has a long talk with Dumbledore.

A more accurate title for this book might have been: "Harry works out his differences with everyone, and people who never got any love are now appreciated." Speaking of which....

Severus Snape

Even though this part of the book was borderline sentimental/nostalgic/corny, I must admit that I enjoyed it.

Some great humor

I don't remember where in the book this was, but at one point I literally laughed out loud. There was a lot of fun humor in this story. I especially enjoyed the jokes about Voldemort's nose and Malfoy's hair, and how Jack Thorne kept playing around with J. K. Rowling's statement that she wished Ron and Hermione hadn't ended up together. She deserved that one.

Dumbledore wisdom

There was one paragraph in this book, spoken by Dumbledore (well, OK, his portrait) that was absolutely beautiful, so much so that I wonder if Thorne wrote it himself or if he asked Rowling for some Dumbledore wisdom, because I don't think anyone can write Dumbledore quite like J. K. Rowling.

Also, I LOVED it when Harry tells Ginny that he'd do anything for his son, Albus, and Ginny says, "Harry, you'd do anything for anybody. You were pretty happy to sacrifice yourself for the world." It's funny and sad and beautiful and true.

And now I have a question:

Who is the cursed child of the title?

Is it Albus? Scorpius? Delphi? Harry? Cedric?

Any of these characters could vie for that title, which is pretty interesting. So maybe there's not one cursed child, but several. Food for thought. Should be a book-club discussion prompt.

At the end of the day, I really did enjoy reading this book (which I did in a 48-hour period). I'm sure it would be cool to see on stage, and maybe if I did see it on stage, I'd find that I liked it more. But I'm not going to consider this story Harry Potter canon - I'd rather think of it as an imaginative supposal: a fun story about the Harry Potter characters, but not something that actually happened.

This is the 21st century, post death-of-the-author; readers can make their own meanings. And that's what I'm going to do.

Until tomorrow.

So you think you can dance? You obviously haven't seen Newsies.

Disney's Newsies
Broadway's Smash Hit Musical
http://www.newsiesthemusical.com/

Starring Joey Barreiro, Morgan Keene, Zachary Sayle, Daniel Switzer
Music by Alan Menken
Lyrics by Jack Feldman
Book by Harvey Fierstein
Choreography by Christopher Gattelli
Some Other Stuff by Some Other People

April 21, 2016
Keller Auditorium, Portland, Oregon, USA


Right now I feel like Katherine Plumber - the young reporter and heroine of Newsies; I can't figure out how to begin this review. So let's just start with what I'll inevitably end up talking about anyway: the insane dancing in Newsies.

The dance numbers are the Newsies trademark and without a doubt the most incredible part of the show. When you go to see Newsies you go to see News Boys performing crazy dance routines - and you're not disappointed. The best dance numbers are featured in the songs "Carrying the Banner," "Seize the Day," and "King of New York." My favorite is the "Seize the Day" dance break, which, by the way, you can (sort of partly in a very simplified version) learn to do yourself by watching the tutorial video on the Newsies website.

If you're not sure what I mean by insane dancing, imagine a bunch of guys doing back-flips, sustained pirouettes, mid-air splits, spinning on newspapers, tap-dancing on tables with spoons, basically any and every incredible dance move you can imagine but didn't think was possible for mere mortals to perform - and then picture the Newsies doing it: 'cause they do.

Then picture them doing it in turn of the 19th century New York dress, and picture all of them as really good looking. That's Newsies.

Oh yeah, and they also sing.

Joey Barreiro as Jack Kelly in Newsies

I saw Joey Barreiro as Jack Kelly (the star of the show) and he was amazing - at his curtain call the applause rose ten decibels and everyone in the audience gave him a standing ovation. Of course he was a great dancer, and he played Jack Kelly with all the charisma, inner turmoil, and passion that the character demands. Also he had this small talent called being able to sing - really sing. When he belted "Santa Fe" (his big solo) from the rooftop, it was perfect.

Zachary Sayle as Crutchie with Joey Barreiro as Jack in Newsies

I also LOVED Zachary Sayle as Crutchie, Jack's best friend and brother in all but blood. I actually think Sayle might have been the best actor in the cast, and that's including all the "adult" cast members. His "Letter from the Refuge" song was perfect - with just the right blend of understated suffering and wry humor that the scene requires.

Davey was played by understudy Daniel Switzer, who apparently usually plays Race. Switzer did a fairly good job, but I wasn't crazy about him, and Davey is usually my favorite character. Part of that could have been the writing, though; I felt like Davey's character wasn't as fleshed out as it could have been, and he wasn't really allowed enough of a character arc throughout the show. As a point of comparison, in the Newsies movie (1992), Davey's character undergoes a dynamic transformation from the smart but timid and responsible oldest son to the fearless strike leader who has the guts to put his own words across instead of letting Jack speak them for him. I am definitely not suggesting that the musical should have been more like the movie; I'm just saying I would have liked a little more Davey.

The musical focused a lot on Jack's inner struggle to do the right thing for the Newsies, and that's great; but I felt like a couple of the main supporting characters had to take a step down and become less interesting so Jack could have the spotlight the whole time.

Morgan Keene as Katherine Plumber with Joey Barreiro as Jack Kelly in Newsies

And then there's Katherine Plumber, the show's heroine and Jack's romantic interest. I'm sure it's a fantastic role when played well, but I couldn't get behind Morgan Keene as Katherine; and I don't think it was just jealousy over the fact that she was surrounded by Newsies all the time. Her singing voice was great, but her acting style and speaking voice kind of drove me nuts. She was too whiny, I think, and most of the time she spoke in a sardonic tone of voice that I found irritating. At the very least, I wasn't convinced she was a match for the indomitable and dynamic Jack Kelly.

The Newsies

Everyone else in the cast was fine. Of course all the Newsies were great, Anthony Zaas was hilarious as Spot Conlon, though he didn't get enough stage time, and all the adult actors were good. The choreography and lighting were amazing, the set brilliant, and the orchestra perfect. Unfortunately, the music was just slightly too loud, which sometimes made it hard to discern what the actors were saying. I seem to remember this being a repeated problem with shows at the Keller Auditorium, so I don't know if it's just the venue or what.

Another thing (I don't know if it's a criticism or not), the show seemed to move REALLY fast - as in when Act I ended and the lights came on in the theatre, my sister and I turned to each other and said, "what? already?" As I said earlier, I think the show could have benefited from a little more character development and a little more conflict, or maybe just conflict that was drawn out a little longer than it was. But I think there might have been a very good reason for this, which is that the musical is geared towards a younger audience. It's still a really fun show if you're older, but I think the way the story unfolds is meant to cater more to kids than adults, and (though I can't technically speak as a kid) I think it hits the mark spot on in this respect.

The Newsies in "King of New York"

Finally, I want to give a shout out to the audience for having an awesome level of engagement and enthusiasm throughout the whole show. There was laughter, applause, and audible drawn-out gasps throughout, and an overwhelming ovation at the end. Maybe part of that is just the show's dynamics; but it helps to have a good audience.

And at the end of this review, let me just say it one more time: THE DANCING.

All in all, Newsies is an exhilarating amount of fun, a definite family musical, and entertaining across ages, featuring inspiring characters, a good message, and dance scenes you never knew could happen.

So if you get the chance to see it, I'd say, yeah, seize the day.
(You knew that pun was inevitable.)

Until tomorrow.